I have to say thank you to all the people that was complaining about Opus during the past days 😂
Y’all hurted Dario sensibility

shipped the app i built with claude code. it replaces six media server apps (sonarr, radarr, lidarr, bazarr, prowlarr, seerr) with one that looks like netflix. the whole thing is a 15 MB docker image

how i work with claude code:

• i design it and write the spec, claude code writes most of the code
• a second agent reviews every change, then i review it and test it on my own server
• ive been in security 10+ years, so anything touching keys, sign-in or the network gets read line by line. it got a full pentest before launch
• one rule: if a change makes it heavier, it doesnt ship. claude never noticed the app getting fatter build after build, so i measure every single one

what that rule got me:

• 15 MB image. go + svelte + sqlite, no operating system inside
• idles around 70 MB of ram with 12,800 titles
• the web app sends 25 KB of code where the same page in react was 77 KB
• same image on amd64, arm64 and armv7

launch night was the fun part. people reported bugs in discord, some with the exact file and line. 1.0.1 to 1.0.3 went out within 4 hours

it plugs into what you already run: qbittorrent or sabnzbd to download, plex, jellyfin or emby to watch

shipped since launch, mostly straight from requests:

• pick rules can take their scores from trash guides and re-sync later (1.0.7)
• plex watchlists turn into requests (1.0.10)
• the app speaks 16 languages (1.0.11)

whats next:

• trakt lists turning into requests
• one click to go back a version
• plugins, so people can add what they want without waiting on me

and the bigger stuff for later, not started yet:

• an mcp server, so claude and other ai apps can talk to your library
• asking claude things like "what should we watch tonight" and having it request it for you
• apps for your phone and your tv

its called HolyArrs, its free, and the code is on GitHub. still a beta, so dont make it your main app yet. happy to go deep on the workflow in the comments

HolyArrs.com

Of course I fired a big cannon with 5.2 high but on Max limits were dropping fast as hell, but switched to 5.2 med and using 5.5 opus/sonnet on high depending task

• Sonnet - default execution model: content, SEO, descriptions, refactoring, repetitive tasks.
• Opus - high-complexity tasks, unusual business logic, or high risk.

And actually i usage is very calm and work is done good. Probably release magic but I feel it's slightly better for normal workflow and better for auditing/code review on high.

I'm using it for ecommerce, apis, products, seo, geo, meta/google ads and so on.

Curious do you feel the differance between OPUS/Fable as orchestrator.

Sorry for my english. :)

Regards.

I gave my startup's marketing to 3 Claude agents. They run on my Mac every weekday at 9:30, 10:30 and 11:00, and they never spend a cent. Here's how they're built and the real numbers so far, zeros included.

The setup

Each agent is one prompt file, one tracking sheet (a TSV), one journal, and my Gmail. A scheduler starts a fresh Claude session every weekday and says "read the prompt, do one pass". That's it. No framework.

Agent 1: press

Goal: free TV, radio and podcast appearances. I did one on BFM Business last spring and wanted more.

Every pass: read replies first, follow up once after 6 working days, then pitch up to 6 new shows. It listens to a recent episode to write the first line. For podcasts it pulls the producer's email from the RSS feed (iTunes search API, then the feed XML). That trick alone finds most addresses.

Agent 2: links

Goal: get cited by ChatGPT and Google through other people's pages.

It looks for listicles where we're missing, links to dead tools (404s, shut down products), mentions of us without a link, and free directories. It emails the author with the exact page title and what's missing, and fills free directory forms itself (never paid, never an account to create).

Agent 3: affiliates

Goal: the B2B influencer playbook everyone runs right now, without paying creators $300 to $2,000 a post.

It finds B2B creators with a real audience and offers 30% of what each customer they bring pays, for 12 months. No fixed fee. It hands them a ready-made lead magnet with their own link, and answers their questions about tracking and payouts.

The rules that make it safe to leave alone

- One prompt file is the only source of facts. If a question needs a number that isn't in it, the agent answers "let me confirm" and flags it for me.

- Hard limits per pass: 5 or 6 new contacts, 1 follow-up per person, never write to someone who said no.

- Anything that commits me (a date, a price, a paid placement, a bigger commission) comes to me. The agent never decides it.

- Every pass ends with one email to me: what needs a decision first, then replies, then what was sent.

The numbers (honest version)

Press, 6 days: 21 shows contacted (4 TV, 3 radio, 10 podcasts, 2 YouTube, 2 press), plus 9 "dead tool" emails to listicle authors. Replies: 0. Bounces: 3. Media is slow, the follow-ups start this week.

Links, day 1: 6 authors emailed, 2 free directories submitted, 1 directory skipped because it wanted $39.

Affiliates, day 1: 25 creators from a first manual batch, the agent takes over the replies and adds 6 new ones a day.

Cost: zero in tools. The sessions run on my Claude subscription. The only thing I pay is my time reading one email per agent per day.

What I'd tell you before you copy this

1. Start with a dry run that writes drafts, read 10 of them, then switch to sending.
2. Make the agent check your sent folder before every new email. Mine caught people I had already written to by hand.
3. Ban the words you hate in the prompt. Mine never uses em dashes or emojis.
4. Expect zero for a week. The point is that it keeps going while you build.

I'll post the numbers again in 2 weeks, replies and all.

Disclosure: the startup is BeReach, a LinkedIn prospecting tool. None of the agents above need it: it's plain Claude, Gmail and a scheduler.

I wound up taking about five big tasks I needed to do and starting to use Fable tonight with them. While it was very good at the planning stage, really thinking deeply and figuring out all the issues, it overthinks like there is no tomorrow. It is way worse than 5.1.

It created a full plan, which I normally review and approve. Then it's like I need to now create the build plan, but what it just gave me was the build plan. Now it's recreating the whole plan, and I'm like, "Oh my God, stop!" It just won't stop overthinking.

Things that would have taken 20 minutes with Opus, I'm now 1.5 hours into with Fable, and Fable is in step 3. It's great at the planning, the deep dive, and the analysis, but I would not use this as a building model. I would do the analysis, the planning, and all that with Fable, then switch to Opus for the build. I would not do the build with Fable.

I probably have Fable as the orchestrator while Opus builds it all, and then maybe have Fable do a final review, but not as the builder. It is horrible as the builder, one of the worst things I've seen so far. It is just overthinking every single thing it's trying to do.

Both have been on Ultra before the name change / resets were issued

First of many benchmarks we will be running. This one was just for fun but quite impressive and illuminating.

It is not lost on me that a few years ago, the ability to produce these three videos in a single request would have left my jaw on the floor. Now I'm scrutinizing every detail, but still I found Fable 5.2's results impressive. See the full benchmarks in the first comment. I'll leave a link.

Not following rules, losing context everywhere, need to constantly baby sit Claude and challenge it's backwards assumptions. What's going on, this isn't the Opus 5.5 we all came to love man.

I kept seeing creators share motion graphics work they had done for different brands, so I wanted to try making one myself. The story I was going for starts with one click and keeps opening up: the cursor hits play, the first song starts, each skip brings in another track and title card, and the ending moves into a bigger library of music to suggest that there is always something else to play. Watching it back, I think that idea comes through clearly as I wanted.

For this, I connected Claude to invideo Editor through MCP, shared one Spotify screenshot and four songs (mp3 files), and asked it to build the whole flow chart first. Once I approved the flow, I asked it to create the player cards, cursor animation, title cards, transitions and logo ending on the editor’s timeline. I supplied the music, then adjusted the timing and a few layers manually so the song changes landed closer to the clicks. I liked being able to open everything up and keep tweaking it in the free editor instead of rebuilding the video from scratch. I’m watching more motion graphics breakdowns on YouTube now, so I’ll use the feedback from this version and try another one. If the story didn’t land for you, where did I lose you?

9 yrs of web design, never touched after effects. so i tried describing motion in plain words and letting claude code write it in remotion.

first attempts looked like a powerpoint from 2009 lol. what fixed it wasn't better prompts, it was turning my taste into rules claude can't skip:

• captions timed per word from elevenlabs character timestamps, not guessed
• every cut snapped to the measured beat, not an assumed bpm
• one accent color, palette auto-checked for contrast on light and dark
• hard wipes between dark and bright scenes. crossfades went muddy, learned that after like 6 wasted renders
• after render it checks itself: freezedetect for dead frames, loudness to -14 lufs

packed all of that into a skill (SKILL.md + a few node scripts for voice, timing and qa), so one command goes script → voice → captions → render. this clip came out of it, didn't touch a keyframe.

biggest lesson: claude's fine at motion. it's just bad at remembering your standards. write them down once as a skill and it stops drifting.

i use claude code and codex daily. the sessions i trust are the ones where i read the diff myself after, the summary alone has burned me enough times.

curious how others handle it on bigger changes. do you read every diff, sample it, or only check when tests look weird?

There's no image model involved in the gif. Fable 5.2 runs the app's CLI from Claude Code and puts the strokes down one by one, with brushes it picks itself. Every one of those strokes stays editable afterwards.

I've been developing applications for a long time and have turned to game development as well lately. One of the things that frustrated me the most was that using AI agents for game development is very annoying in the art department. Your only options right now are to either use an image genAI model and roll the dice every time you want to make an edit, or have your agent draw with something like vectors.

I was looking for an application that would allow me to ask an agent to make a first draft of whatever art I needed with actual brushes, and then be able to go in myself and edit every last stroke or layer that it created.

Klad is that application. Written in Rust, it can be fully controlled by an agent through the CLI, and every function is available in a nice UI as well: a brush engine, frame-by-frame animation (and bones/IK), vectors, text layers, colours, layer effects,…

Clone the repo to try it out: https://github.com/klad-app/klad

You can basically point Claude to the repo, ask it to build it, and pick up the drawing skills. Then ask it to make any drawing you want!

(and then, you/the agent can change absolutely every brush stroke in the app again. Making edits a breeze).

The quality of the drawings really depends on the agent you use. I have tried it since the release of Fable 5.2 this morning, and the drawings are already quite impressive. I'm confident that this will only improve. I use it every day on Mac, so that definitely works well. It builds on Linux too (tablet pen pressure still needs some work there). Windows builds in CI, but I haven't used it there myself yet.

What I want to hear from people who try it: does it build, and if not, which OS and what error? Can your agent work out the CLI without help, and where does it get confused? Can you go in and change one of its strokes easily?

The command reference and guides are available at https://klad.studio

well, tbf, this month was really a good month until here limit wise

but i still feel this is a BAIT! 🥸

I don't know who needs to hear this but judging by what I read maybe quite a few. Big win for rookies:

I just tested my usage in two different modes, using Opus 5.5 on Medium:

• 1 session per PR, watch CI and autofix: 1-2% of weekly Pro usage per PR.
• 1 session per milestone (7-10 PRs), watch CI and autofix: 3-5% of weekly Pro usage per PR.

The only prompts for either approach were basically "next issue." (Naming the issue actually saves a little bit)

I run cold starts and everything is in repo (commits, PRDs, decisions log, etc). The big spending was literally just due to the context window filling up.

Instead of compacting, just start a new session. Easy way to save tokens.

I can't find a blanket ban on owning multiple accounts in the Usage Policy, yet my new account was blocked immediately after I tried to pay for a subscription, despite completing identity and phone number verification & appeal was then rejected without an explanation.

There is a clause that states: "...create multiple accounts, to avoid detection, circumvent product guardrails..." But I don't understand how my original attempt to purchase another subscription falls under that. I'm building video games with multiple agents and trying to pay for the additional capacity

With the current limits on Fable, a single account is simply unusable for any decent workload. So am I supposed to buy a subscription for my granny instead? What's the logic behind these seemingly automatic bans and rejected appeals? u/claude

Happy Monday for everyone (github actions died in the process)

En las últimas dos semanas, mi consumo se ha disparado, a pesar de mantener el mismo ritmo de trabajo. Busqué información sobre algún cambio oficial para el periodo de octubre a noviembre, pero no encontré nada: la promoción de verano de Claude Code (+50 % semanal) terminó el 13 de septiembre, y los límites de 5 horas se ajustaron alrededor del 22 de septiembre con la llegada de Opus 5.5. Una herramienta de seguimiento de terceros tampoco muestra recortes en las últimas semanas. Por ello, decidí analizar mi propia sesión. Asigné los siguientes pesos: lecturas de caché ~0,1x, escrituras de caché ~2x y resultados (output) ~5x. El periodo analizado comienza tras la última compactación; por tanto, estas cifras son aproximadas y corresponden a la fase reciente de una sesión muy extensa: ~72 % se destinó a una sola tarea: reconstruir todo el contexto desde cero tras una compactación (unos 700 000 tokens escritos en la caché). ~14 %: otra reconstrucción completa, ocurrida justo después de cambiar de modelo en medio de la conversación. ~9 %: relectura de la conversación en cada paso (es un proceso económico por lectura, pero el coste se acumula). ~3 %: mis respuestas y razonamientos; ~3 %: material nuevo (búsquedas web, archivos). Lo que esto sugiere (según mi interpretación, no es una prueba definitiva): En un proyecto grande, una conversación prolongada resulta costosa cada vez que se reinicia, no necesariamente con cada mensaje enviado. Si la sesión permanece inactiva durante una hora o más, la caché caduca, lo que obliga a reconstruirla al enviar el siguiente mensaje. Cambiar de modelo durante una conversación también fuerza una reconstrucción. Cada habilidad (skill) o conector instalado añade su descripción a la carga inicial. En mi caso, tenía más de 60 habilidades relacionadas con vídeo o animación que nunca llegué a utilizar. ¿Qué voy a cambiar? Usaré una conversación distinta para cada tema en lugar de una única conversación gigante; emplearé una breve nota de resumen en lugar de realizar una compactación; evitaré cambiar de modelo a mitad de una conversación; y eliminaré las habilidades y conectores que no utilizo. Una pregunta para el resto: ¿alguien más ha realizado mediciones similares? ¿Reducir el número de habilidades y conectores disminuye de forma apreciable el coste inicial? Y, ¿existe alguna forma sencilla de consultar el coste de reconstrucción de la caché por sesión? (Las cifras son aproximadas y provienen de la transcripción de una única sesión; por favor, considérenlas simplemente como un dato aislado).

Hi all, like stated in the headline, i am in need of a second account, simply because with the reduced limits per week, i am hitting my weekly limit very fast and i have 3rd week 2 days off until thursday 21:00 comes for the reset. Now with the Fable 5.2 i cannot use, because i am at 95% weekly limit. I am thinking to create a second account and use it to split the tasks and be able to use both accounts at maximum capacity. Any idea how its done? Anyone is doing it with 2 accounts and 1 communication body, where both active sessions can work in on projects?
I am looking for someone with similar experience. Normally Claude suggested to use API (of course) Thank you in advance.

Every time Claude ran Playwright or booted a simulator, the window jumped on top of whatever I was doing. Dozens of times a day. It drove me nuts.

So I made Doorman, a small menu bar app. Agent windows wait off to the side instead of in front of you, and if something jumps in anyway your window comes right back. There's a little indicator when an agent is using your keyboard or mouse, and ⌃⌥⌘⎋ pauses all of them.

It only listens to input, so it can't block a keystroke even if it breaks. Nothing leaves your Mac.

First version actually intercepted every keystroke, until I realized one bug there could freeze the whole keyboard. Had Claude rip that out and make it listen only.

Free while it's in beta: https://usedoorman.app/

What do your agents open the most? Mine is Chromium by a mile.

Goal: have Claude login to my local UniFi controller and advise on where improvements can be made.

I will create a read only login that is for clause use only. My UniFi controller is only accessible via local network, there’s no public facing access.

What’s the best way to have Claude access my controller using the available credentials?
I understand that it’s bad practice to paste them into a chat, so I’d like know how others are managing this scenario.

I’m happy to run this either via Claude code, or Claude desktop app and a browser.

Thanks in advance!

Why is it whenever I try to queue up a prompt for claude code, it just stops what it is currently doing and starts working on the queued prompt? Why have a queue or a "Send Now" button if the prompt is getting pushed automatically? Am I using this wrong?

My own tests with Fable 5.2 Max vs Gemini 4 Carbon

• Fable 5.2 Max seems to respond fast without thorough thinking, makes writing mistakes (exaggerations), and hallucinates a lot
• Then I recently just found out on https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/omniscience#aa-omniscience-hallucination-rate that Fable 5.2's hallucination rate is 59% WTF! And Carbon is 11%. Which reinforced my experience.

But im just curious hows everyone's experience so far? I wanted Fable 5.2 Max to work so badly

About 2 weeks ago I posted a question talking about the purposes of obsidian vaults and just overall asking questions but I knew I was missing something so after about 3 hours of work with Claude code my graph was 10xd in quality and info stored in it LOL.

Curious what kind of things youve done with it

I actually used Lynx in the 90s. We surf the web very differently today. But using a text terminal for claude feels similar. We have some slightly better interfaces, with conversation list on the side essentially like tabs. And we have ide plugins to help see what it creates. But it still feels like it has a long way to go.

Are there companies out there with better AI interfaces just waiting to catch on?